PaNderry have no clue how networks work. If he do, he will not be writting that ****ty article. If the government is bent on censoring his site and if they do as he claims, then the foreign embassies that access his site will not be able to do that as well. To censor his or any site from been access from the country is not a great deal for an ISP to do. However what I find crazy about this is that he is claiming to be partially restricted. This is very similar to the hacking story. He claimed to be following the perpetrators, but have you heard anything since? Panderry is a self obsessed promoter. It is always about him.
PaNderry have no clue how networks work. If he do, he will not be writting that ****ty article. If the government is bent on censoring his site and if they do as he claims, then the foreign embassies that access his site will not be able to do that as well. To censor his or any site from been access from the country is not a great deal for an ISP to do. However what I find crazy about this is that he is claiming to be partially restricted. This is very similar to the hacking story. He claimed to be following the perpetrators, but have you heard anything since? Panderry is a self obsessed promoter. It is always about him.
I understand your stance on the Freedomnewspaper, however I'm familiar with networks and IT in general and it is indeed possible to do selective blocking. Let me ask you this, is it not possible today for parents per se to block certain sites that they deem inappropriate? Why then would it not be possible for the same to be done on the ISP level based on IP addresses that they assign to each subscriber? I ask once again, is there anyone on the ground that can verify that this site is indeed blocked to general public?
Justice must be served as impunity brings more repression and corruption!
Topic Locked
Posted - 20 Sep 2006 : 17:41:43
